Featured Videos

Proposed Constitutional Amendments for November 8, 2011 Election

Authorizing legislature to provide an exemption from ad valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homestead of the surviving spouse of a 100 percent or totally disabled veteran.

Supporters Say: By allowing a surviving spouse to transfer the surviving spouse’s exemption to a subsequent homestead, the proposed amendment would permit the surviving spouse to move to a different home, including a home closer to family, without losing the exemption.

Opponents Say. The state should not provide for new property tax exemptions at a time when essential services such as public education and health care are underfunded.

Amendment No. 2 (S.J.R. 4)

Providing for the issuance of additional general obligation bonds by the Texas Water Development Board in an amount not to exceed $6 billion at any time outstanding.

Supporters Say: The increase in Texas’ population and the persistent threat of severe drought highlight the need to update infrastructure to meet current water needs and to anticipate and plan for future water needs. Without the additional bonding authority, critical water planning and infrastructure upgrades will be greatly impeded or halted altogether.

Opponents Say:. Funding for implementation of the state water plan is inadequate and should be considered where possible.

Amendment No. 3 (S.J.R. 50)

Providing for the issuance of general obligation bonds of the state to finance educational loans to students.

Supporters Say: Recent cuts in federal financial aid and the elimination of certain federal financial aid programs, together with expected reductions in available state grant programs, likely will increase the demand for student loans, and low-interest, fixed-rate loans.

Opponents Say: National student loan debt presently exceeds national credit card debt, and certain media sources have identified student loans as a potential catalyst for a widespread financial predicament similar to that relating to subprime mortgage loans.

Amendment No. 4

(H.J.R. 63)

Authorizing the legislature to permit a county to issue bonds or notes to finance the development or redevelopment of an unproductive, underdeveloped, or blighted area and to pledge for repayment of the bonds or notes increases in ad valorem taxes imposed by the county on property in the area.

Supporters Say: Counties should have the same ability as cities and towns to finance needed public improvements in areas that are deteriorating and designated as reinvestment zones. The proposed amendment would provide a mechanism for financing structural improvements in a defined area without a tax increase.

Opponents Say: Authorizing counties to implement tax increment financing to fund transportation or other projects in a reinvestment zone could create an incentive to appraise property in the zone at a higher value.

Amendment No. 5 (S.J.R. 26) Authorizing the legislature to allow cities or counties to enter into interlocal contracts with other cities or counties without the imposition of a tax or the provision of a sinking fund.

Supporters Say: By allowing a local government to enter into a contract with a term of more than one year without having to impose a tax or create a sinking fund, the proposed amendment would increase government efficiency by allowing for the consolidation of more programs, services, and projects.

Opponents Say: No comments opposing the amendment were made during the house and senate committee hearings on the amendment or during discussion of the amendment in the house and senate chambers.

Amendment No. 6

(H.J.R. 109)

Clarifying references to the permanent school fund, allowing the General Land Office to distribute revenue from permanent school fund land or other properties to the available school fund to provide additional funding for public education, and providing for an increase in the market value of the permanent school fund for the purpose of allowing increased distributions from the available school fund.

Supporters Say: The proposed amendment is necessary to clarify the constitutionality of the General Land Office’s authority to distribute revenue derived from permanent school fund land and property directly to the available school fund for distribution in the next biennium to the state’s public schools.

Opponents Say: The permanent school fund is meant to provide interest revenue from investment of the fund’s permanent assets for distribution through the available school fund to the public schools in this state, and it would be unwise to spend funds that otherwise would be invested.

Amendment No. 7 (S.J.R. 28)

Authorizing the legislature to permit conservation and reclamation districts in El Paso County to issue bonds supported by ad valorem taxes to fund the development and maintenance of parks and recreational facilities.

Supporters Say: Currently, the City of El Paso’s park system, used by both city and El Paso County residents, is underfunded. The proposed amendment would facilitate the creation and maintenance of a regional parks district in the county through certain bonding and taxing authority currently available in 10 other counties.

Opponents Say: The proposed amendment would provide an opportunity for further taxing authority in El Paso County, a property-poor county. In this current economic climate, government leaders should be focused on sustaining the local economy and generating revenue rather than on creating additional debt.

Amendment No. 8 (S.J.R. 16)

Providing for the appraisal for ad valorem tax purposes of open-space land devoted to water-stewardship purposes on the basis of its productive capacity.

Supporters Say: Active conservation will account for 23 percent of the state’s future water supply, and the state water plan endorses voluntary water stewardship as a water conservation strategy. Promoting water stewardship is sound and sustainable water conservation policy. Farmers and ranchers would have a financial incentive to run fewer cattle on their land, helping to preserve the land’s habitat and native plant and animal species.

Opponents Say: The proposed amendment and its enabling legislation could provide a way to undermine the agricultural-use property valuation, or have other unintended consequences.

Amendment No. 9 (S.J.R. 9)

Authorizing the governor to grant a pardon to a person who successfully completes a term of deferred adjudication community supervision.

Supporters Say: The Texas Constitution currently authorizes the governor to pardon a person who has been convicted of a crime but not a person who has completed deferred adjudication community supervision. This allows a situation in which a person who is convicted of a violent crime may receive a pardon while a person who is charged with a nonviolent crime and is placed on and completes deferred adjudication community supervision is not allowed to seek a pardon.

Opponents Say: Providing the means by which a person who completes a term of deferred adjudication community supervision may be pardoned would not efficiently achieve the goal of expunction of criminal history record information because the person still must proceed through the pardon process involving the Board of Pardons and Paroles and the governor, a process that historically has resulted in few pardons.

Amendment No. 10

(S.J.R. 37)

Change the length of the unexpired term that causes the automatic resignation of certain elected county or district officeholders if they become candidates for another office.

Supporters Say: Under the current resign-to-run provision in the Texas Constitution, an officeholder could file an application for a place on the general primary election ballot as late as January 2 of the primary election year, the current filing deadline, at which time the officeholder would have less than one year remaining in that office and would not be affected by the resign-to-run provision. Because Senate Bill 100 changes that filing deadline from January 2 to the second Monday in December of the preceding year, a conforming change to the constitutional resign-to-run provision is necessary to preserve the original intent of that provision.

Opponents Say: No comments opposing the amendment were made during the house and senate committee hearings or during discussion of the amendment in the house and senate chambers.

Who said anything about cutting Veteran's benefits? I sure didn't say it and don't believe we should. That's not my argument.
Let me say it again. I voted against Prop 1 because it raises my property taxes to pay for ... More ›

Who said anything about cutting Veteran's benefits? I sure didn't say it and don't believe we should. That's not my argument.
Let me say it again. I voted against Prop 1 because it raises my property taxes to pay for yet another exemption or extension of an exemption to help out veteran's spouses a little bit. OK, it's not much, but my point is that this stuff adds up over time and adds to an already over burdensome taxation. It is the proper role of the federal government to help them out, but as you say, it's not their priority. That does not make it the role of the State of Texas to pick up the tab for a commitment that the Feds owe to Veterans and their spouses. I'm sorry, but it's not right for politicians to buy votes with my hard earned and rapidly dwindling life savings. Because, you and I both know that's what this is all about.
By the way, I do happen to know a bit about the civil service system and veterans preference points, because I have actually used that benefit myself. As you say, it didn't help much because of all the other preference points and lists of the special protected groups. So, we agree on that too.
As for the 45 miles you have to drive to use the commissary and Px, I have a 70 mile round trip to go to Costco. So what? That was your choice to live where you do. Just gas up on post and you'll save a few more bucks there too. Heck, stop off at the Class 6 and maybe by the time you're through, you will have paid for your trip.

I think we can cut from Veterans. The VA has as much waste as every other agency. In fact I have never understood why we give as many benefits as we do, particularly to married military. BAQ is a waste. We ought to have less ... More ›

I think we can cut from Veterans. The VA has as much waste as every other agency. In fact I have never understood why we give as many benefits as we do, particularly to married military. BAQ is a waste. We ought to have less lifelong military members anyway. Focus on cutting retiree's and adding 1-2 term enlistees. Much better long term.

Rocking Rambler, Im on your side on those issues. I just dont believe we need to cut from Veterans. I agree with you in that we need to quit giving money to all these different countries. We need to get out of Germany, Kuwait, ... More ›

Rocking Rambler, Im on your side on those issues. I just dont believe we need to cut from Veterans. I agree with you in that we need to quit giving money to all these different countries. We need to get out of Germany, Kuwait, Afgan. That is costing the taxpayers billions of dollars a month to keep up and running. I just dont believe we need to touch any veteran benefits. Government needs to trim the fat and look at programs within thier world before they worry about a veteran cut. I dont support the way this administration spends and it needs to cut back on itself and leave the VET's alone. You make it sound like the vets get soooo much. I earned my pension as Im sure you would if you ever served or worked at a job that had a pension plan. Tricare, meds are not free, I pay for that yearly. Yes I get to use the commissary and Px, but I live over 45 miles away, with gas prices, I would just rather go to HEB. And obviously, you have no clue about how the civil service works. Just like most things its pretty crooked. Its not the best person for the job, its who you know. Just because you served, doesnt mean you can just walk into a job.

Well Trooper, thanks for the example and it sure explains why you deserve all your veterans benefits that you receive from the federal government, i.e., your pension, your disability payments, your medical and Tri-care, tax exempt ... More ›

Well Trooper, thanks for the example and it sure explains why you deserve all your veterans benefits that you receive from the federal government, i.e., your pension, your disability payments, your medical and Tri-care, tax exempt post privileges, like, commissary, Class 6 (luxury item) liquor store, your VA loans, G.I. Bill, Veteran’s preference points for civil service jobs, etc.
But, since that’s apparently not enough to repay you for your 25 years of military employment and resultant painful ankles, I would support a bill in the US Congress to increase your VA benefits, and pay for it out of any other spending cut in the federal government, including the DOD, like base closures in countries like Germany and Japan that we don't really need for defense. The money we send to China as foreign aid and interest on our debt would buy a lot of Veteran benefits. Or, how about the money we waste paying for the UN to sit there in New York bashing the US at every opportunity?
And, when I think about how much money Obama spends traveling around the country and World campaigning for re-election and apologizing for the USA, it makes me furious that I am then asked to pay more property tax to make up the deficit so that we can reward the Veterans for their service.

Well said Winston. Rocking rambler, reagardless wether your injuries were sustained in combat or non combat, if it still happened while you were on active duty, you are still considered a disabled VET. Let me give you a prime ... More ›

Well said Winston. Rocking rambler, reagardless wether your injuries were sustained in combat or non combat, if it still happened while you were on active duty, you are still considered a disabled VET. Let me give you a prime example, I jumpe out of airplanes for the military for 18 years. It wasnt combat, yet it was to keep me trained and ready if I were ever called upon to do it combat. So in all the years of airborn operations, there were times I suffered sprained ankles, concussions, lower back injuries etc. Its non combat, but it is still an injury I sustained while in the military. So even if I had never deployed to combat, I still suffered injuries during my career. When you file for disability its for your entire military career, not just combat duty. I think we deserve that based on what we need to do to be combat ready and effective. Hope that explains it for you.

I notice Winston did not differentiate between combat related and non-combat related disabilities.
To equate the two is just wrong and is a disservice to those who really sacrificed for the rest of us, veterans or not, who ... More ›

I notice Winston did not differentiate between combat related and non-combat related disabilities.
To equate the two is just wrong and is a disservice to those who really sacrificed for the rest of us, veterans or not, who didn't.
Anyone who served 25 years should know and appreciate the difference.

First, you prioritize what you want, and then you build a budget built on what you are willing to tax. In the world, there is this misconception you can pay for everything. You can’t so you prioritize. The rest of the world ... More ›

First, you prioritize what you want, and then you build a budget built on what you are willing to tax. In the world, there is this misconception you can pay for everything. You can’t so you prioritize. The rest of the world is learning this the hard way. Look at France, Italy, Greece, and Spain who are bankrupt from too many programs. What amazes me is the first thing people want to cut is veteran’s benefits. A country that does not honor its veteran’s first will not be a country for long. As a veteran who served 25 years in the service, there just isn’t an equivalent to the sacrifices. Yes, I am a disabled veteran. I find it offensive anyone would question my disability. I medical doctor diagnosed me with the conditions and I feel the pain. The process to get the VA disability is a long and difficult process. Ask the thousands who are still waiting years later like my brother-in-law.
I saw so much waste in the military on buildings and weapons programs that someone should be arrested, but it was legal. So, now we have debt crisis and the government is going after our medical benefits which was promised to us. They are going after our retirement benefits, too. Yes, Virginia, the government lies. You want to cut waste. Get rid of the food stamps program for abled body people (we are a fat nation according to pollsters – let’s go on a diet); reduce the free housing we give to abled body people (check out for yourself how much we spend on this program); penalize people who have kids out of wedlock over and over again to get benefits; get rid of the department of education, stop political fraud or crony capitalism (i.e. building billion dollar light rail trains – See Senator Reid), the list goes on and on. Go after the billions of waste to political operatives and pork barrel, etc. Get our military out of Europe; quit subsidizing the world in several many areas. The solutions are easy. Leave the vets alone. In prop 1, when the veteran dies, the spouse loses most if not the entire veteran’s income. Most will struggle. Prioritize what is important – Veteran’s first, and then work from there.

"Its not the veterans that have us in debt, its the rest of the freeloaders we are paying for. "
Well, of course it is not entirely the vets that have bankrupted the government. I didn’t say or imply that. But ... More ›

"Its not the veterans that have us in debt, its the rest of the freeloaders we are paying for. "
Well, of course it is not entirely the vets that have bankrupted the government. I didn’t say or imply that. But this amendment is just one more example of pandering politicians adding to an already bloated, bankrupt government by playing on our sympathy for disabled Veterans and putting the burden on property tax payers who already are paying too much.
Non-combat service related disabilities are already compensated by the VA, and I feel that is sufficient. If you feel that is not enough, then please suggest where the federal government can cut spending on other programs and special interests groups to pay for higher VA compensation of our vets. I’m sure Congressman Cuelliar will be all ears.
But, if you want to honor those true heroes, the ones actually injured in combat, we must make sure that freeloaders don't take advantage of our local generosity.
"the VA doesnt give it out like candy."
You say the VA doesn't hand out disability ratings easily. I don't know, but I can't help but feel that many non-combat vets are abusing the system. The process is too complex, entirely too subjective, run by bureaucrats and guided by political correctness. I just don’t trust it, and most Vets don't either. And I don’t think we as property tax payers should be subjected to the decisions of yet another inept federal bureaucracy.

Rock n chair rambler, Disabled vets do not get full exemption only those who recieved 100 percent disability rating. I served 27 years in the Army, with 8 tours in Iraq, 4 in Afghanistan, 1 in Phillipines, Somalia and Haiti. ... More ›

Rock n chair rambler, Disabled vets do not get full exemption only those who recieved 100 percent disability rating. I served 27 years in the Army, with 8 tours in Iraq, 4 in Afghanistan, 1 in Phillipines, Somalia and Haiti. I come from a family of military veterans as well and will tell you, that back in the days of the World war 1 and 2 and vietnam, those vets didnt get thier fair share. My grandfather took shrapnel to his back yes while driving for a General and lost a few vertebrates because of it and was only recieving 20 percent disability which get you nothing. No tax exemptions, no DV plates nothing. You have to get at least a 50% percent disability rating to get anything and the VA doesnt give it out like candy. Even if you were to get lets say 70%, well that gets you about 7k off of your property taxes. When you take that to the tax office they will just asses your property is worth more then it truly is, usually by 7k more, so you still pay. I know, this from truth. So 70% really doesnt get you much, 7k off of property taxes, free liscense plates for 1 car only, free parking at meters in town. Now you tell me that is alot for what our veterans have done for this country. Just because you never went to war but served 20 years, you are still a veteran and you may get no disablity rating so you dont get a thing other then your retirement pay, which they earned. I believe veterans should be allowed to be tax free, but the only time that happens is when they are deployed to war or a hostile area. We fought for our freedom and its not the veterans who have this country in debt. Go to the VA hospital and see if they get special treatment. Once you retire, you go to the back of the line for everything the military has to offer from seeing a doctor to getting your meds. I get my retirement pay and that is it, no free medical, no free meds, nothing. I pay my taxes. Its not the veterans that have us in debt, its the rest of the freeloaders we are paying for.

Election day polling placex
Wilson County voters wishing to weigh in on the 10 proposed amendments to the Texas constitution can cast votes today at the following polling places. Polling is from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. today.
•Boxes ... More ›

"Obviously you never served your country"
Obviously you don't know me very well. And it is obvious that you don't read very well either.
Disable vets already get a full exemption, regardless of how they were ... More ›

"Obviously you never served your country"
Obviously you don't know me very well. And it is obvious that you don't read very well either.
Disable vets already get a full exemption, regardless of how they were disabled. Did you all know that? That's right. A guy who was a typist or maybe drove the captain around and never saw a day of battle in his career could get a full exemption from his property taxes even if he, or she becomes disabled from cancer or something and not a road side bomb. I don't know if that's how it was intended, but as we all know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Be that as it may, this amendment extends the exemption to his or her spouse, for life.
Now, I'm all for supporting the military and all they do and sacrifice for our freedoms. But, this is purely one of those feel-good politically motivated moves that does nothing but makes politicians look like they care and well, who could be against the vets??? This crap costs money and this is exactly why the State is 25 billion in debt.

I will consider voting for Prop 1, BUT forget the rest. I agree the military is the backbone of this Nation. I need to think about this exemption because it is for the spouse and not the Veteran, if I understand it correctly. ... More ›

I will consider voting for Prop 1, BUT forget the rest. I agree the military is the backbone of this Nation. I need to think about this exemption because it is for the spouse and not the Veteran, if I understand it correctly. Just not sure about this.

We owe our veterans all that we can aford to give them and we should honor and appreciate them. It's the freeloaders who live off our hard work and tax dollars who need to take up the slack. It is absolutely time to revise our ... More ›

We owe our veterans all that we can aford to give them and we should honor and appreciate them. It's the freeloaders who live off our hard work and tax dollars who need to take up the slack. It is absolutely time to revise our tax system so that everyone pays. Also the immigration laws need to be enforced. Enough is enough.

Veterans get enough already? Really? Obviously you never served your country. They are the ones that SHOULD get exemptions. They fought wars so you can enjoy the freedom of mouthing off about anything that gets your craw. So ... More ›

Veterans get enough already? Really? Obviously you never served your country. They are the ones that SHOULD get exemptions. They fought wars so you can enjoy the freedom of mouthing off about anything that gets your craw. So you can express your self, and pretty much do anything you want so long it is legal. They have given us the ultimate sacrifice of their lives, and those who survived have to live with the horrors witnessed fighting the enemy. Everyone else should pay their taxes. Veterans earned the exemptions.

Anything that starts out with "bond issue" and follows up with "ad velorum taxes" just means higher taxes for me. I'm going to "just say NO" to all of it.
And puleeeease... stop with the ... More ›

Anything that starts out with "bond issue" and follows up with "ad velorum taxes" just means higher taxes for me. I'm going to "just say NO" to all of it.
And puleeeease... stop with the exemptions. I'm sick and tired of paying the way for everyone else, and disabled vets get enough already. Their spouses can stay where they are. Where does it stop?????
If everyone had to pay an equal share of the tax burden, we wouldn't have the corrupt, inept and bankrupt system we have. Too damn many people aren't paying their fair share, so they continue to vote for their neighbor's taxes to be raised for all this garbage we don't need.

Oct 17th I attended a meeting which speaker David Wall of the Liberty Institute, presented a non-partisan short summary of the ten proposed Amendments.
Pros and cons were presented and after hearing both sides the 100+ who attended ... More ›

Oct 17th I attended a meeting which speaker David Wall of the Liberty Institute, presented a non-partisan short summary of the ten proposed Amendments.
Pros and cons were presented and after hearing both sides the 100+ who attended found little they would support. Many of the Propositions would support Agenda 21's objectives ( one example is Prop 4 HJR 63 which could raise sales tax for transportation, use property taxes to build toll roads, & grant tax breaks to who they want).
Please visit www.wilsoncountypatriots.com or www.freevotersguide.com to view the pros and cons they list. We all agreed to support Prop.1 SJR 14.